Will Turkey's Wait for EU Membership Finally End?

Despite Turkey's economic weight and its security importance to Europe, its path to joining the European Union remains blocked.

The political relations between Türkiye and the European Union are in a climate that can be described as winter and cold. Although European markets are still the most important destinations for Turkey's export goods, this country has to pay large customs tariffs for exports and has not been able to gain points in this direction.

Since Turkey has practically lost hope for full membership in the European Union, it is now looking for scenarios based on which, even if it does not become a full member, it can at least enjoy some privileges of customs tariff reduction and ease of visa issuance.

But the evidence shows that the European Union does not intend to give concessions even in this field, and although it has considered special facilities for Ukraine and Montenegro, it has not included Turkey in the list of recipients of low tariff concessions as a candidate for membership.

"We have been waiting at the back door of the European Union for almost 70 years," the independent news-analytical website Yetkin Report wrote in a humorous tone. Not only is the door not open, it is not even half open. The sounds inside are not very encouraging. In some international meetings, with a half-joking and half-serious tone, they say: The British did Brexit. It is better for Turkey to leave before joining the European Union.

We must remove the expectation of membership from the center of our foreign policy and end the psychology of indefinite expectation. This does not mean turning our backs on Europe; Rather, it means redefining our relations in the changing balance of global power.

Economic analysts say: Türkiye has a high economic advantage to join the European Union. Thus, the nominal size of the Turkish economy in 2025 was approximately 1.6 trillion dollars. According to World Bank data, the total economic volume of 16 selected European countries, mainly in the Baltic, Balkan and Eastern Europe, including Hungary, Ukraine, Bulgaria and Slovakia, is approximately $1.46 trillion. It means that Türkiye alone has a larger economy than the sum of all these countries. This comparison dramatically shows Turkey's economic weight.

"Despite all the problems Turkey faces, with a population of approximately 86 million, industry, agriculture, tourism, defense production, entrepreneurs and strategic geography, Turkey is a player that cannot be ignored in the future of Europe," says the Yetkin Report. Furthermore, in 2025, trade in goods between Turkey and the EU will exceed 217 billion euros.

Given our strong economic ties, why are we still in the waiting room politically? It is in the context that Turkey's journey towards Europe began in 1959, the Ankara Agreement was signed in 1963, the Customs Union was implemented in 1996, and accession negotiations began in 2005.

Despite the advantages mentioned in this example of economic analysis, Turkey and the European Union have many contradictions and differences from the point of view of political approaches, and cases such as the dispute with Greece and Cyprus in the Aegean and Mediterranean have made it difficult.

But a group of Turkish analysts are constantly trying to insinuate that the EU's distance from Turkey will also harm Turkey itself.

In a situation where Turkey expects to enjoy new privileges in the field of customs tariff, the discussion in some European circles about the option of a free trade agreement instead of a customs union is worrying for Ankara.

One of the assumed scenarios of the analysts close to the Turkish ruling party is that the European Union's dependence on the United States in the field of defense, the threat of Russia, competitive pressure from the United States and China in technology, high energy costs, NATO's internal challenges, an aging population and low growth are significant problems, and according to these cases, the Union is forced to give Turkey special privileges.

Mehmet Ogutci, one of the former Turkish diplomats and an expert in energy macro strategies and foreign policy, says: "If Europe constantly postpones its relations with Turkey and creates new obstacles, it may lose significant economic and geopolitical opportunities in the coming decades with the formation of the new world order."

Turkey may face similar costs if it delays its reforms due to frustration with Europe. The European Union should be told: close the membership waiting room. Even if Türkiye diplomatically maintains its EU membership goal, it should remove the indefinite waiting period from the center of its foreign policy.

A new strategic cooperation should be negotiated with Brussels on the basis of political equality, reciprocity and clear interests formed with a win-win approach. The differences between Cyprus and the Aegean Sea should not hold all areas of cooperation hostage.

Another point is that economic integration should increase. Joint ventures should increase in artificial intelligence, defense industries, clean energy, critical minerals, digital commerce and supply chains. Turkey should not only be a production base, but also a technology and innovation partner.

Oghutchi advised both sides: "Make a strategic roadmap for 2036." A 10-year cooperation should be established with measurable objectives that include Black Sea and Mediterranean security, energy communication, competitive industrial and technological cooperation, Middle Corridor, migration management, defense technologies and research cooperation. Turkey should also accelerate reforms in the rule of law, economic stability and institutional trust.

Türkiye's historical, economic, cultural and security ties with Europe cannot be severed. However, it is possible to remove EU membership from a perpetually deferred promise for an uncertain future. Türkiye's exit does not mean leaving Europe; Rather, it means removing the expectation on the doorstep of Europe from foreign policy. The European Union may not want to accept Turkey. Türkiye does not have to tie its entire strategic future to this decision.

But in response, EU officials have consistently emphasized that there is no shortcut for Turkey or other candidates.

A brief look at the positions and views of European think tanks and research institutes shows that some of them have advised the EU officials to have a reasonable relationship with Turkey in an expedient and far-sighted way, but another group has a critical attitude.

In a report by Maria Simeonova, the European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR) pointed out that "Europe needs a new chapter in regulating its relationship with Turkey." Because Europe's security needs cooperation with Türkiye, especially considering the war between Russia and Ukraine and the uncertainty of America's commitments. Instead of limiting the relationship, Europe needs a defense deal that expands political dialogue and cooperation in security, economic and regional fields.

This analysis is based on the belief that despite the truth of the criticisms of Erdogan's government regarding the illegal restriction of the political will of the opposition, expediency dictates that Europe does not distance itself from Türkiye. Because Turkey's withdrawal from European arrangements limits Europe's security capacity.

Another report prepared by the European Union Commission has pointed out that the security of the Black Sea is one of the latest requirements for maintaining EU relations with Turkey.

This report pointed out that the European Union has no other way to play a role in securing the security of the Black Sea, except to cooperate with Turkey, and by depriving Turkey of strategic cooperation, Europe loses part of its defense and geopolitical power.

In another similar analysis, the Center for European Policy pointed out that the relationship between Türkiye and the European Union has become too dependent on short-term deals. Defense cooperation can be a starting point for deepening the relationship, but without a long-term vision and political trust, it will not be enough on its own.

On the other hand, some think tanks and analysts have a different point of view and see the conflict and difference of interests between Turkey and the European Union at a high level.

The German Institute for International Affairs and Security (SWP) in examining Turkey's role in the future security architecture of Europe often maneuvers geopolitical factors and defends Turkey's strategic importance for European security, but makes a clear distinction between defense cooperation and EU membership.

From the authors' point of view, Türkiye, despite its military importance, has a limited alignment with Europe in some of the Union's foreign policies and even contradicts them; including against Russia and Western sanctions.

The analysis says that the European Union can influence Ankara with proposals such as visa facilitation, updating the customs union and greater participation of Türkiye in European security arrangements; But these privileges must be subject to democratic principles, rule of law and human rights.

In a relatively sharper approach, Carnegie Europe, in the report "Turkey's ambivalence is a threat to European security", warned about the deepening of the relationship and is more cautious about the consequences of Europe's security reliance on Turkey.

Its main argument is that security cooperation without regard for democracy, justice and accountability may lead to unstable arrangements. The author emphasizes that the weakness of the rule of law in Turkey is not only an internal issue and affects the type of participation of this country in the European security system.

In the end, it should be said: the relations between Turkey and the European Union have faced many challenges and European think tanks are openly discussing the issue that limited partnership and companionship with Turkey in some areas of security, defense and migration should not lead to the promise of full membership and showing shortcuts to circumvent the legal criteria of the Union.